Crr Leathers, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
ITA 616/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2017AY 2008-09
Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.616/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 M/S. Crr Leathers, The Income Tax Officer, 9/5, Patnool Sardarjung Street, Vs. Non Corporate Ward 4(3), Periamet, Chennai 600 003. Chennai 600 006. [Pan: Aaafc4173G] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K. Ravi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.06.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 5, Chennai Dated 27.10.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09, Wherein, In The Grounds Appeal, Besides Challenging The Confirmation Of Various Additions For Want Of Tds Under Section 195 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], The Assessee Has Mainly Challenged Confirmation Of Reopening Of Assessment, Which Is Barred By Limitation.
For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 40
…a)(ia) and 40(A)(2) of the Act, which is amply clear that the Assessing Officer failed to properly scrutinize the return of income filed by the assessee, wherein, the deduction was claimed. By relying on the decision in the case of CIT v. Arvind Remedies Ltd. 378 ITR 547 (Mad), the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that if the Assessing Officer has not considered the claim of deduction at the time of passing order under section 143(3) of the Act, the assessee could not be fastened with any liability and moreover, it is against the law laid down in the statute. Thus, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has p…
